1. Each child has a unique learning styles;
2. Effective teachers adapt their lessons to appeal to each learning style.

I agree with #1. I disagree with #2. Shouldn't teachers try to correct and train a student's learning style?

I think most agree that the following are the major learning styles.

visual (learn by seeing)aural or audial (learn by hearing)reading/writing (learn by processing text)kinesthetic or practical (learn by doing).

Now I think teachers need to try and train students into the text-based learning style. dont we always say we have to teach students how to learn? seems to me if we cater to a given learning style we might be handicapping that student by not teaching him/her the one learning style that will keep that student learning all their life long.

I would have to say, a good teacher should encourage development of all learning pathways, not catering to one style alone, but using the one that is the emphasis, to associate with the others. A blind child, for instance, can not be a visual learner, but by using his kinesthetic and auditory learning tendencies, he can develop his processing power, to read and write, and solve problems. I would definitely say that a teacher should be aware of the child's learning abilities. Learning is done by connecting feelings, images, sounds, tastes, and smells. Using all of the senses will enable a child to comprehend more, but ignoring the tendency in one over an other would be a big mistake.

Well, the important thing is learning, not so much the way you learn. Given, you need decent reading/writing skills regardless of your learning style, but there's no reason why you should be forced into learning (or rather trying to learn) one way just because that's the way most other people find easiest.

I think children tend to gravitate toward the style that suits them best. There may be times when they need a little guidance in how they can use their learning style, if they don't come up with something on their own. Someone who is 'hands-on' will choose hands-on activities to reinforce something they are learning or having trouble with. I believe learning styles are God-given and are wonderful to watch in action--especially when it helps them hit the bulls-eye.

Theodore wrote:Well, the important thing is learning, not so much the way you learn. Given, you need decent reading/writing skills regardless of your learning style, but there's no reason why you should be forced into learning (or rather trying to learn) one way just because that's the way most other people find easiest.

I respectfully disagree with this. I think that when children aren't taught to learn in the 'reading' mode, they are shortchanged for life. if they are going to be life-long learners, then they are going to have to be able to learn by processing text. they can't go to school all their life.

cornopean wrote: they are going to have to be able to learn by processing text. they can't go to school all their life.

This is partly true, but text is not the only way we learn. Yes, Children need to learn to process text, but learning how to observe things and think critically, (converting to productivity) is far more important in a practical sense. Not every form of learning requires reading, though reading is highly beneficial if you want to learn certain things, it, (in my honest opinion) is not the best learning pathway, as it is not the first learning pathway. It's a great tool though, and we should most certainly learn how to learn from text.

I respectfully disagree with this. I think that when children aren't taught to learn in the 'reading' mode, they are shortchanged for life. if they are going to be life-long learners, then they are going to have to be able to learn by processing text. they can't go to school all their life.

That's just reading comprehension, and it comes naturally if you read a fair amount and have the proper basing in phonics. Everyone should know how to read well, true, but just because you CAN learn through reading doesn't mean you HAVE to learn through reading. A lot of things are more easily learned through visuals or audio or manipulatives, and why make your life more painful than it has to be?

I have a child that is a definite visual and hands-on learner. If I forced him to be a different person I would be changing who he was made to be. A plumber doesn't need to have great reading comprehension and an accountant doesn't need to be good with his hands. We all need to know how to do a little of everything but when it comes to the real world we dont need to BE everyone. That is why we have diversity and that is a good thing!

I tend to think the foundation of the "three R's" is essential to learning- that being said one can learn to read and write and do math in various ways which reach out to the different styles.

Just because your top critical skill is auditory does not mean you cannot or should not learn to read well. A child of that mentality can still learn to read well and come to enjoy reading IF they are taught to read within their style. The problem, in my opinion, of forcing one into text learning by one path, is that they have found that children who have dyslexia did NOT have to have dyslexia. This is because learning styles have to do with the way each person's brain is geared. One cannot change that nor apparently mold that. However, Phonics can be taught to all learning styles. It is one thing the whole language people had right, the focus in reaching all styles so more children could be literate with out being put into "special" classes and then being tagged and having a disablitiy to boot. I guess that is something to consider here- by forcing children to learn the foundaton of learning one way- because they cannot change their brain's wiring- actually creates a disability where there need not have been one.

There are methods of teaching reading with phonics that use each of the critical thinking pathways. You don't have to teach just one part to one child and another to the next (and maybe get it wrong if you didn't evaluate the child's style correct). You use the complete program and it in a sense catches each child enabling them to become good readers regardless of their style. So though they may not "get" the visual aspect, because there is also auditory, etc. alongside of the first it opens the world of reading to all people of all styles. It is simple, but specific, so it does not cater to one type nor slow anyone down - which in my mind is the only concern of teaching strictly to a more unique style anyway.

momo3boys wrote:I have a child that is a definite visual and hands-on learner. If I forced him to be a different person I would be changing who he was made to be. A plumber doesn't need to have great reading comprehension and an accountant doesn't need to be good with his hands. We all need to know how to do a little of everything but when it comes to the real world we dont need to BE everyone. That is why we have diversity and that is a good thing!

but God takes your child and (if they are regenerate) makes them into something they aren't. yes?
I disagree that a plumber doesnt have to have reading comprehension. I think he does if he is going to be a lifelong learner.

cornopean wrote:I disagree that a plumber doesnt have to have reading comprehension. I think he does if he is going to be a lifelong learner.

Does a plumber have to be a life long text-learner? If he doesn't have a need to read extensively, he shouldn't have to be as good at reading as a Lawyer or a College Professor. It's basically a waste of time if all he will ever read are road signs and product labels. Yes he should know how to read, but no, he shouldn't have to specialize in reading. Just my thoughts.

Does everyone want to be a life long learner. I know I do but I live with one person, my father-in-law, Who never reads more than a newspaper or the TV guide. He is happy where he is and doesn't feel the need to have great reading comprehension. He is happy if he can fish and hunt. Not a lot of reading required.

Does everyone want to be a life long learner. I know I do but I live with one person, my father-in-law, Who never reads more than a newspaper or the TV guide. He is happy where he is and doesn't feel the need to have great reading comprehension. He is happy if he can fish and hunt. Not a lot of reading required.

With utmost respect for your Father-in-law and others who do not have a great reading comprehension, I do not think that we should sluff off reading comprehension for the sake of ease or convenience. The greatest source of learning for the greatest needs of our lives is in text format--The Bible. I think if we say that we are content with reading road signs and labels only, we are saying that we are content on missing out on the great blessings of the revelation of God. This also means if you fail to give your child the ability to grasp what he reads, you are also robbing him of such blessings as well. I do believe that God desires all peoples to be life long learners.